Smallest Possible

[HomicideHenry]

Let's say a heavyweight like Chuck Wepner is the baseline test for someone like Canelo Alvarez. I think maybe a majority might pick Canelo to beat Wepner. That's a middleweight. But how low can you go before a topflight boxer couldn't beat a guy like Chuck Wepner?

Would you say welterweight? Lightweight? Bantamweight? Lower than that? Give your thoughts.

[Ezzard]

15 rounds?

[HomicideHenry]

15 rounds?

Let's say a ten rounder.

[goose 5]

Man, great question. I once asked Mike Weaver if a prime Sugar Ray Leonard could last one round with him and he said "no way", but I have my doubts cause Ray could run.
As for your example, it's a very tough question; if we were talking and not posting I think the conversation could last hours.

[HomicideHenry]

Man, great question. I once asked Mike Weaver if a prime Sugar Ray Leonard could last one round with him and he said "no way", but I have my doubts cause Ray could run.
As for your example, it's a very tough question; if we were talking and not posting I think the conversation could last hours.

I think it's a fair question. We've had so many topics as to size differences, etc and I figure Chuck was arguably the weakest of the 1970s contenders. Him being 6'5" and 220 pounds basically he'd definitely have all the size and reach, but wasn't too overly good to make the matches intriguing.

Wepner vs Canelo (Super Middleweight)
Wepner vs Charlo (Middleweight/Jr Middleweight)
Wepner vs Crawford (Welterweight)
Wepner vs Haney (Lightweight)

All ten rounders. I think any longer it'd benefit Chuck too much, any shorter it'd benefit the smaller guys too much. I'm surprised Alp hasn't been jumping all over this since he says size means basically nothing.

[goose 5]

Tony Mundine at 164 beat Foster Bibron at 210 in 1972. Huge skill disparity in Mundine's favor. But there wasn't a 9 inch height difference like Wepner would have over Canelo. I'm not saying Canelo loses cause of that but it is a problem.
Does Willie Pep beat Tim Tomashek ?

[AngryGoon38]

"Bob Fitzsimmons" fought and beat Much Bigger Boxers.
He also beat a 300 lb boxer while he weighed 160.
I think that "Marvin Hagler" would've beat Chuck Wepner, despite the Dramatic size difference.
Carlos Monzon, Sugar Ray Robinson, Roy Jones Jr(All At 160), and Tommy Hearns, would've all prevailed versus Chuck. And with Tommy,(Whether at 154, 160, 168, or 175). Yes, even at 154, Tommy would've taken Chuck I strongly think.
SRR, even at 147, would be at least a 50-50 bout versus Chuck.

[giacomino]

I would add Jorge Castro at 160. He would have been giving up size obviously but he had an iron jaw (fought for titles at 190) and had a punch like a mule. Really only had trouble with fast-handed boxers, which Wepner was not

[Controversial]

Tony Mundine at 164 beat Foster Bibron at 210 in 1972. Huge skill disparity in Mundine's favor. But there wasn't a 9 inch height difference like Wepner would have over Canelo. I'm not saying Canelo loses cause of that but it is a problem.
Does Willie Pep beat Tim Tomashek ?

Charley Burley at 151 knocked out Jay Turner at 220 in 1942.

[Ezzard]

Who is Wepner's equivalent in later decades? Give me an 80s, 90s, 00s, etc guy...

[goose 5]

Jean-Francois Bergeron.

[HomicideHenry]

Who is Wepner's equivalent in later decades? Give me an 80s, 90s, 00s, etc guy...

I would say maybe Kevin McBride. Although goose 5's nomination of Jean-Francois Bergeron is good too.

[Ezzard]

Part of the issue is that when these fights happen the smaller guy is usually the star and so the whole thing is set up for them to win. Look at Roy Jones etc...

If the ref really was neutral and the ring not super-sized...

Alvarez has the whiskers to win. Haney has to be too small.

Crawford is super talented and could dance and move to a decision. Maybe. I would likely think he could do it. But without a ref in his pocket how does he fare when McBride gets in and mauls him???

[HomicideHenry]

Part of the issue is that when these fights happen the smaller guy is usually the star and so the whole thing is set up for them to win. Look at Roy Jones etc...

If the ref really was neutral and the ring not super-sized...

Alvarez has the whiskers to win. Haney has to be too small.

Crawford is super talented and could dance and move to a decision. Maybe. I would likely think he could do it. But without a ref in his pocket how does he fare when McBride gets in and mauls him???

The McBride who fought Tomasz Adamek would've been pretty problematic for the little guys. McBride was pretty competitive in that match. Adamek might've not been an all-time great but he was certainly close to near greatness.

But as you said if you had a neutral referee and a ring somewhere around 18 or 20 feet, the little men would've needed to have brought their A+ game. So, the consensus seems lightweight is a bridge too far. Welterweight is a maybe. Middleweight is plausible.

[Ezzard]

MW is plausible. But Charlo? Not convinced. Crawford is a league above. It's possible.

But a neutral ref who allows the big man to work up close...

[Teddy's Toupee]

Who is Wepner's equivalent in later decades? Give me an 80s, 90s, 00s, etc guy...

The Klitschko brothers.

[gilgamesh]

Who is Wepner's equivalent in later decades? Give me an 80s, 90s, 00s, etc guy...

I would say maybe Kevin McBride. Although goose 5's nomination of Jean-Francois Bergeron is good too.

I'd compare him more to like a Duhaupas kinda guy.

[Jaywheel]

Who is Wepner's equivalent in later decades? Give me an 80s, 90s, 00s, etc guy...

The Klitschko brothers.

Wepner wasn't THAT bad.

[margaret thatcher]

mike mollo for wepner

its a good question homi. canelo could at least fringe contend at hw. but i wouldnt pick a jermall charlo over wepner

[HomicideHenry]

Who is Wepner's equivalent in later decades? Give me an 80s, 90s, 00s, etc guy...

I would say maybe Kevin McBride. Although goose 5's nomination of Jean-Francois Bergeron is good too.

I'd compare him more to like a Duhaupas kinda guy.

Good call. Maybe even Mariusz Wach.

[Redback Rasta]

It is easy to forget sometimes that size really does matter in boxing.

Jump into the ring with someone bigger and stronger than yourself and see how you get along.

[HomicideHenry]

But here's where it gets interesting...

If Chuck, arguably the weakest of the 1970s contenders, could potentially lose a ten rounder to Canelo, let's bump up the class of heavyweight incrementally.

Instead of Wepner in there, let's say Buster Mathis. All 6'3"-6'4" and 240+ pounds of him. He went 11 with Frazier, the full route with Quarry and Ali and defeated Chuvalo. Ten rounds. Can Canelo beat him?

If not.... then we need to look at our present day 175 pounders because our best middleweight will not be able to overcome the size/skill differential.

[Redback Rasta]

Before we are finished with Wepner, let's not forget he is one of only 4 to have ever knocked Muhamad Ali off his feet and Ali fought some of the biggest punchers in the history of the heavyweight division.

[Controversial]

Before we are finished with Wepner, let's not forget he is one of only 4 to have ever knocked Muhamad Ali off his feet and Ali fought some of the biggest punchers in the history of the heavyweight division.

I wouldn’t read anything into this, it wasn’t counted as a knockdown, not seen it in years but pretty sure he either stepped on his foot and Ali lost his balance, he certainly wasn’t hurt

[HomicideHenry]

Before we are finished with Wepner, let's not forget he is one of only 4 to have ever knocked Muhamad Ali off his feet and Ali fought some of the biggest punchers in the history of the heavyweight division.

The asterisk is this... Wepner stepped on Ali's foot as he simultaneously threw the punch. It was a bad ruling by the referee, and all it did was piss Ali off because from that point on he started hitting Wepner mercilessly.

As to how hard Wepner actually hit. I suspect he was like Tex Cobb. A lot of his punches were arm swings with no real power behind it. If he stopped people it was mainly due to them being exhausted from trying to tee off on Chuck.